Durham has the worst park system of any major city in America.
In May, the Trust for Public Land released its 2026 ParkScore index, which grades the park systems of the 100 most populous U.S. cities on access, acreage, amenities, equity, and investment. Durham finished dead last, with a score of 35.5 out of 100. The national median was 53.7.
Where is the urgency? Where is the outrage? We. Have. The. Worst. Parks. In. The. Country.
Durham trails every nearby North Carolina city on the list. Raleigh spends about four times as much per resident on parks ($289 vs. $70) and scores 18 points higher. Greensboro, a city close to Durham’s size, spends nearly twice as much and ranks 20 spots ahead. Even Winston-Salem, which spends slightly less than Durham, outscores it by distributing park space more fairly across neighborhoods.
The first step in solving a problem is acknowledging the problem exists, so I will write it again. We have the worst parks of any major American city. And it did not happen overnight. In 2020, Durham ranked 72nd. We fell to 82nd in 2021 and stayed there in 2022. Then came 89th in 2023, 92nd in 2024, 97th in 2025, and last place in 2026. In six years, Durham did not improve its ranking once. And we didn’t just fall behind. We cut back while everyone else moved forward.
In any other field, a slide like that could cost people their jobs. If Duke fell 27 spots in the college rankings, if the Bulls finished last in the minor leagues, or if a restaurant had the worst rating in Durham, would it be business as usual? Certainly not.
When the rankings came out this year, a city spokesperson told The Chronicle that ParkScore does not “fully reflect the unique strengths, priorities and community impact of Durham’’s park system.” Perhaps not, but this is the kind of happy speak that minimizes the problem and gets in the way of solutions. The city promises “accountable city government.” Accountability means acknowledging a six-year slide to last place, not dismissing the measurement.
The ParkScore should be taken seriously. According to the National Recreation and Park Association, the “Trust for Public Land’s ParkScore® index provides a comprehensive evaluation of park systems in the 100 most populated cities in the United States. The index aggregates information from public and private organizations supporting parks in each city. … Cities are scored by comparing their data in each category to the median across all cities. The primary goal of the index is to help city leaders and residents advocate for needed park resources and provide relevant data to inform local park improvement efforts.”
In November 2024, Durham voters approved an $85 million parks bond: $43 million for a new aquatic center at Merrick-Moore Park and $42 million to rebuild East End and Long Meadow parks. When we voted, the city told us both projects would open in summer 2028. Parks and Recreation now says both are slated for 2030. East End is stalled behind lead cleanup. Even on schedule, this bond is a bandage on a system that has been underfunded for years. The timeline is slipping the same way our rankings have.
The delays are only part of the problem. We are also simply not investing enough money. This creates a chicken-and-egg scenario where we don’t have enough money, while we simultaneously are unable to spend what we have efficiently.
At the September 24 City Council work session, Parks and Recreation came to council asking for permission to apply for a $15 million federal grant to “close the current gap” on the East End and Long Meadow project. Staff explained that the estimates voters were shown before the bond was approved were conceptual and left out design, permitting, cost escalation, and other soft costs. Councilmember Chelsea Cook said what many of us were thinking: “I’m a bit confused about why the budget estimate was so drastically different.” We are talking about underestimating the cost by 35.7%.
Those costs should have been foreseen. We spend an awful lot of taxpayer money on planning, but didn’t plan effectively here. Every construction project has design fees, permits, and inflation. But if you missed a budget by more than a third at your job, you’d be explaining yourself to your boss, or looking for a new one. Who in Durham city government is being held accountable?
For years, a lack of investment has created challenges for our parks. Now the inability to plan and deploy the money we do have is part of the problem, too. And if the federal grant doesn’t come through, it isn’t clear what happens next.
Everyone at Durham Parks and Recreation, General Services, and the City Manager’s Office, including the city manager, should be on notice. Failure has been accepted for too long. Excuses have been accepted for too long. Moving slowly and indecision have been accepted for too long. We cannot fix our parks without acknowledging the problem and the need to shake things up.
City Council meets on the first and third Mondays of every month at 7 p.m. at City Hall and on Zoom. You can sign up to speak on agenda items and public hearings, and the City Clerk’s Office at 919-560-4166 can walk you through it. Next spring’s budget public hearing is where park funding is won or lost, so be there if you are able. Email your council members. Ask every person who runs for City Council or mayor what their plan is to get Durham out of last place.
Durham may have the worst parks in the nation right now, but we deserve better—Durham can do better. Last place is a choice. It’s time to choose differently.
Zack Czajkowski serves as a planning commissioner, is a Durham Chamber of Commerce member, and is the vice president of the Eno Community Tennis Association. He lives in East Durham with his wife, Dr. Sarah Cunningham, their son Archibald, and their bulldog Petunia.
Comment on this story at [email protected].
